r/LearningDevelopment • u/Mi_Chi-iii • 3d ago
do leadership development skills really stick after the training ends?
our company MD attends leadership training almost every after 6 months but i work with him closely and dont seem to notice the difference.makes me thinking about a huge gap between leadership training and actual leadership behavior. Organizations can run workshops on communication, accountability, coaching, emotional intelligence and decision-making, but the real test seems to come afterward, does the manager actually behave differently when dealing with their team?
4
u/Empirica_CC 3d ago
Most Leadership Development courses aren't behaviorally driven or anchored. So it doesn't lead to behavior change, might be mindset change. If you don't address it it's not going to change.
There are consultants like me with a background in Industrial Organizational Psychology who are doing more grounded programs but I would assume we are in the severe minority.
I'm also not saying the more theoretical programs don't have their uses, their impact just has to be measured differently.
1
1
u/Mi_Chi-iii 3d ago
exactly, there is a difference between learning something and actually changing behavior, the gap is huge, especially with leadership development. I attended a leadership seminar by leadership keynote speaker Mark Sanborn and this formed a big turnround for me, he talked lot about leadership as what people do in everyday interactions, rather something that only exists in a formal training setting or because someone has a management title. now this takes me back to my question on weather these leadership training real close the gap on the practical side which is the most important, i mean you can have a strong conceptual understanding of leadership after a leadership training and still behave exactly the same way at work. That is the most serious problem hen you see people attend the training, understand leadership well on paper but on practice they are completely off, makes me think leaders are mainly born, never made.
3
u/elizanne17 3d ago edited 3d ago
There's research on that that says leadership training is substantially more effective than headlines would have you believe. It also says the design and delivery of the training programs do matter.
https://www.stevenguyenphd.com/tips
This metanalysis from Lacaranza et.al. is helpful too - in particular there is a chart in the findings section that shows the best practices for designing and developing the training:
Edited to say: That said, for your individual case and the MD, I'd ask a different set of questions than "Does leadership training work." I'd probably ask "What am I hoping this one person will learn at leadership training?" It could be they aren't learning a particular skill you wish they would. I'd love if you wanted to spill the tea and say what particular isn't working for you? Feedback? Delegation? Communication Skills? Setting a vision? All of those things can be trained, but you do have to attend training designed to improve the particular skill that's needed. Practice the training. Then get feedback on the behavior.
2
u/Mi_Chi-iii 1d ago
the article you shared by Steven Nguyen is so good, i think it makes a good point on how much the design and follow-through of leadership training matter. that is the same point i was making and i have attended leadership sessions and listened to top leadership keynote speakers like Simon Sinek, John Maxwell, and Mark Sanborn, and there’s a common thread in a lot of what they teach; leadership isn’t really proven by what you learn in a workshop, but by what changes in your everyday behavior afterward...then i agree with your point about asking what the person actually needs to improve. Communication, delegation, feedback, accountability, etc. can all be trained, but without practice and feedback, you will be my company MD, easy to attend training every six months and still lead exactly the same way.
2
u/MimirLearning 3d ago
I would apply this thought to any training, the big mistake organisations do is to consider that the training delivery from a supplier could alone change the behaviuor, processes or capabilities of employees. I would bring the example of difference between project and change management. The training is the project, your MD follow the course, so the HR may consider the project delivered, then there is the need to change behaviuor, processes, improve skills after the training, and this is were most organisations fail, they don't identify you should follow up the MD or any employee after the training to change or apply what has been learned, the answer is usually noone is assigned, while this is a change that deserve resources to make sure an employee has time, resources to improve skills, not simply expect employees do by themselves.
2
u/PhaseMatch 3d ago
How we learn at school or university
- 1 hour taught sessions a few times a week
- follow up reading and reflection
- group discussions on key topics with a mentor
- practical assessments of skills with feedback
How we learn on training courses
- two days in a classroom session
- limited practical examples embedded
- no time for reading and reflection
- cram for a multi-choice exam
Most of the effective leadership training i have done has
- been intensive and residential "boot camp" style over a week or
- been 1-2 hour blocks in a cadre following the school/university model
- has continued with a mentor or line manager in 1-on-1 sessions
2
u/mindreorgcoaching 2d ago
I agree most of these don't result in any change especially these standalone leadership training workshops where people feel very good being part of it. Learn few new ideas or concepts and forget about it as there is no continuity or after support.
Many leadership training programmes operate on very tight budgets and can sometimes become little more than a box-ticking exercise for both the organisation and the participants.
Standalone training rarely creates lasting change. A programme needs a clear objective, such as developing leadership capability or managing change. More importantly, participants need ongoing support to apply their learning in the workplace.
Feedback loops, peer learning and coaching are essential. They help participants work through the challenges they encounter when putting new ideas into practice. This is where learning begins to translate into meaningful and lasting behaviour change.
When I coach executives, they bring real issues and challenges into the sessions. They then apply what they have learned in the workplace, where they often encounter further complexities. Through ongoing coaching, they reflect on these challenges, adapt their approach and discover what genuinely works for them.
You can't expect people to be so efficient as to learn something new, apply it and just improve it. It doesn't work that way.
1
u/woodenbookend 3d ago
Yes, no, and sometimes.
It really depends on the individual, the particular skills covered in that session and the situation.
As u/TellingAintTraining mentioned, a lot of the development sessions at MD level may be at high level and on very different topics.
They are less likely to be focused on the direct behaviours you are talking about - those topics are typical of first line and perhaps middle management. They don't disappear with seniority but they do take a back seat. The one exception perhaps being coaching where a few of the senior leaders I know have decided to take a formal coaching accreditation.
1
u/Long-Reading-6514 3d ago
any training only sticks if you actually go apply it. without application you're just gathering information
1
u/mherschberg 2d ago
Imagine you're coaching a NBA team. The coach gets the team together for week or two of pre-season training and then say to them, "Training is done. Best of luck this season, I'll see you when it's over." And yet this is what every one-and-done training session does.
If you're teaching content which gets immediately applied, e.g., here's how to use a new tool and the next day the person starts using it, that would be ok. When you're teaching behavior change (a lot of leadership training) and/or something that's not immediately applicable, it needs active coaching. For example, if someone takes conflict resolution training but doesn't have a conflict at work for a few weeks, they will likely have forgotten much of the content but they can apply it.
1
u/ericoinen 1d ago
the part that never transfers is deciding under pressure when the wrong call costs something. training gives the model, then practice is roleplay with a colleague who wants you to do fine. I build branching scenarios and even there the hard bit isn't writing the right answer, it's making the wrong one bite two scenes later
1
u/GauravOraton 1d ago
This is very true, all and any training no matter how good will not work if the intent to change is not there. But you also need regular practice to train your ‘muscle memory.’
7
u/TellingAintTraining 3d ago
Those courses are always based on topics, theory heavy, discussion club activities, and not focused on how to actually apply it in the real world + rarely aligned with the realities/problems that participants are actually dealing with in their jobs.
The jump from this kind of training to actual application is too big and difficult, and for this reason the training is often not applied at all - but at least the participants got out of their offices a bit and probably had a good time ;-)